Am I the only person who thinks Kallis was a better player than Tendulkar?

[kyear2]

From what i understand, Sobers was a gun Batsmen sure but his bowling particularly spin was terribad. But then people with rose tinted glasses want us to ignore that. ..

No ignoring that. His spun bowling especially early in his career was bad. The pitches in the Caribbean were just not conducive to spin, look at Gibbs record and s/r. His fast bowling was some what better, but he was also forced to take on a much larger work load than he should have because of some of the weak attacks that he played with. So while some may say and have a point that Kallis had better numbers and may have been the better bowler, Sobers meant much more to his team and was more versatile.
But no he wasn't an ATG bowler, same way Imran wan't an ATG batsman. What he was though was one of the two best 5th bowlers in the game's history. And that ideally would have been his job.

 

[Black_Warrior]

I think he meant as a player which would include his keeping

 

[fredfertang]

Sobers was a totally unselfish player - if he had chased batting records he'd have got many more, perhaps even Bradman's

 

[smash84]

Sobers was a totally unselfish player - if he had chased batting records he'd have got many more, perhaps even Bradman's

As much as I respect your opinions Fred. But on this, JUST NO

 

[fredfertang]

As much as I respect your opinions Fred. But on this, JUST NO

Fair enough - can you give me an example of Sobers batting selfishly?

 

[steve132]

There is only one player who would always have been universally considered to be the best in any category - Sydney Barnes as a medium pacer. Many of those who saw Hobbs considered him superior to Bradman because of his skill on bad wickets. Similarly, during Bradman's prime in the 1930's some old-timers compared him unfavorably with Trumper in terms of style. Few of those who saw Hobbs or Trumper are still alive, and as time goes by fans tend to rely more or less exclusively on statistics when rating players. That is why Ken Barrington, for example, is rated more highly in some circles than Peter May or Denis Compton, although virtually no one who saw those players live shares that view. (There is a very good article to be written about the changes in players' reputations over the years). I have no objection to using statistics when evaluating players - in fact, they are essential for that purpose - but in cricket circles (unlike baseball forums, for example) they tend to be used very crudely and mechanically with little regard for the context in which a player's feats were accomplished.

Debates on the relative merits of various players can be expected to continue. However, while we can't say that anyone is a universal choice in any category, there are some categories on which a clear consensus has been established among informed observers. This is an important qualification, because fanboys tend to be driven by flavor of the month excesses and enthusiasms of various types. The results of general Internet polls tend to be far less illuminating than the views of players, journalists and officials. In particular:

Best Batsman: Bradman - now close to a universal choice among experts. I recently read a Cricinfo thread full of comments from adoring Tendulkar fans who sought to cast doubt on Bradman's achievements.

Best All Rounder: Sobers - none of his alleged rivals garners much support for inclusion in all-time world XI's, or comes close to him in polls of players and journalists. It's not much of an exaggeration to say that the only people who doubt that Sobers is the greatest are those who have not seen him play.

Best Wicketkeeper-Batsman: Gilchrist - probably a consensus choice, although there is still debate about the relative weight to be assigned to wicketkeeping and batting ability. As mentioned in another thread, many former players seem to prefer Knott behind the stumps in their dream teams.

Best Off Spinner: Muralitharan - probably closest to Bradman in terms of being a universal choice. There are a few old-timers who would opt for Laker, but they are very much in the minority.

Best Leg Spinner: Warne - Bradman described O'Reilly as the best bowler he ever saw, but even most of O'Reilly's contemporaries acknowledge Warne as the greatest.

Best Fast Bowler: Marshall - no real consensus here. If you were to take a poll of informed opinion Marshall would probably win, but I would expect to see significant support for Lillee, McGrath and Wasim Akram.

 

[smash84]

Fair enough - can you give me an example of Sobers batting selfishly?

I meant JUST NO on your assertion that he might perhaps have broken Bradman's record. And If he was so unselfish that he could have scored so much more prolifically than Bradman and yet chose not to then he seems quite selfish for preferring his own whims over the interests of the team.

Also how stupidly unselfish was he to perform at half of the capacity that he could have?

 

[the big bambino]

Pakistani players in Sobers' time: Hanif, Mushtaq, Sadiq, Saeed Ahmed, Asif Iqbal, Majid Khan, Zaheer Abbas, Fazal, Mahmood Hussain, Khan Mahommed, Sarfraz, Masood, Wasin Bari

Indian players: Borde, Pataudi, Manjrekar, Umrigar, Engineer (my favourite cricketing name) Viswanath, Gavaskar, Nadkarni, Solkar, Vinoo Mankad, Prasanna, Venkat, Bedi, Gupte, Phadkar, Chandra, Ghulam Ahmed, JM Patel.

No; they weren't minnows.

 

[the big bambino]

Best Leg Spinner: Warne - Bradman described O'Reilly as the best bowler he ever saw, but even most of O'Reilly's contemporaries acknowledge Warne as the greatest.

Well Bradman was one of them and clearly he didn't. Which contemporaries are you referring to? I think most were dead when Warne came onto the scene and almost certainly all were before Warne established a reputation.

 

[Jassy]

I think he meant as a player which would include his keeping

Not even close as a batsman. Far too overrated. Arguably not even the best batsman today. Fair away from home overall (thanks largely to his exploits in Pakistan and UAE) and worse outside the subcontinent than reknowned FTB's like Mohammad Yousuf. I think even Ganguly and Inzamam edge him outside the subcontinent. A rubbish England tour next year might get his average outside the subcontinent in the 30s. Waiting for it to happen

 

[akilana]

Not even close as a batsman. Far too overrated. Arguably not even the best batsman today. Fair away from home overall (thanks largely to his exploits in Pakistan and UAE) and worse outside the subcontinent than reknowned FTB's like Mohammad Yousuf. I think even Ganguly and Inzamam edge him outside the subcontinent. A rubbish England tour next year might get his average outside the subcontinent in the 30s. Waiting for it to happen

And you still didn't get the point.

 

[smash84]

Pakistani players in Sobers' time: Hanif, Mushtaq, Sadiq, Saeed Ahmed, Asif Iqbal, Majid Khan, Zaheer Abbas, Fazal, Mahmood Hussain, Khan Mahommed, Sarfraz, Masood, Wasin Bari
.

I am clearly talking to someone who has no clue as to what they are talking about. Do you have any idea just when Sobers played Pakistan? No, you clearly don't. The only time Sobers played Pakistan was in the late 1950s. He never played them again

 

[Mark68]

I'd like Peter Such to sashay forth into this debate.

Or Richard Dawson. That 'Pommy' off-spinner that Rowdy Mallet rated so highly (see YouTube)...

 

[Jassy]

And you still didn't get the point.

Woooooosh! Pot...kettle...

Point is he is not even close as a batsman, so the question of being a better cricketer doesn't arise AFAIC. Otherwise might as well say Prior is a better cricketer than Cook.

 

[Ray.]

Meh, Kallis is obviously a much much better alround player than Tendulkar but you just can't compare him as a batsman to Tendulkar he's not even close. Maybe you guys see statistics to compare him but it's not good for comparing them as a batsmen. Tendulkar played about 15-20 tests when he was past and his form was going just downhill his form was dropping but he still continued, there is average and statistics got a roll down on other hand Kallis played almost 160 tests before his career began going downhill(This year obs) but still he cracked a ton cover it up.

2ndly Tendulkar dominated every where in the world! Let it be Australia, England or SA(Yeah he do average a lowly 48 as his standards). On other hand Kallis failed in England(was averaging >30 before last years tour where he cracked a daddy on The OVal (ROAD) to make it over 30) and yeah he was not that spectacular in Australia either. And one of his biggest luxury was that he was a South African so he couldn't face one of the deadliest bowling attack of his era which Tendulkar faced and dominated. Tendulkar was carrying the whole team on his shoulders for almost half a decade in 1990's and even faced some of the greats of 1990s like Ambrose etc.

Oh yeah one more thing Tendulkar was obviously a much better than Kallis at statistics if you compare both after 166 matches. And yeah Kallis has also one luxury he could face Indian bowling attack he even cracked a ton against them at his last test lol!

 

[Migara]

newzealand and australia must be in the sub continent in this parallel universe.

 

[Jassy]

yeah that is exactly what I said.

 

[fredfertang]

I meant JUST NO on your assertion that he might perhaps have broken Bradman's record. And If he was so unselfish that he could have scored so much more prolifically than Bradman and yet chose not to then he seems quite selfish for preferring his own whims over the interests of the team.

Also how stupidly unselfish was he to perform at half of the capacity that he could have?

I don't think I'll bite on that, if for no other reason than I'm not entirely sure what point you're trying to make - I suspect one or both of us is under the influence of something!

 

[Maximum]

Meh, Kallis is obviously a much much better alround player than Tendulkar but you just can't compare him as a batsman to Tendulkar he's not even close. Maybe you guys see statistics to compare him but it's not good for comparing them as a batsmen. Tendulkar played about 15-20 tests when he was past and his form was going just downhill his form was dropping but he still continued, there is average and statistics got a roll down on other hand Kallis played almost 160 tests before his career began going downhill(This year obs) but still he cracked a ton cover it up.

2ndly Tendulkar dominated every where in the world! Let it be Australia, England or SA(Yeah he do average a lowly 48 as his standards). On other hand Kallis failed in England(was averaging >30 before last years tour where he cracked a daddy on The OVal (ROAD) to make it over 30) and yeah he was not that spectacular in Australia either. And one of his biggest luxury was that he was a South African so he couldn't face one of the deadliest bowling attack of his era which Tendulkar faced and dominated. Tendulkar was carrying the whole team on his shoulders for almost half a decade in 1990's and even faced some of the greats of 1990s like Ambrose etc.

Oh yeah one more thing Tendulkar was obviously a much better than Kallis at statistics if you compare both after 166 matches. And yeah Kallis has also one luxury he could face Indian bowling attack he even cracked a ton against them at his last test lol!

Tendulkar might be better batsman but saying Kallis is not even close is exaggerating. Also they can't be compared based on statistic only, both played under different circumstances and in different kinds of teams.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Do you have any idea just when Sobers played Pakistan? No, you clearly don't. The only time Sobers played Pakistan was in the late 1950s. He never played them again

And yet you hold his record vs Pakistan so harshly against him